Thomas Floyd Cantrell v. United States
This text of 467 F.2d 1363 (Thomas Floyd Cantrell v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Thomas F. Cantrell challenges his guilty plea to an indictment charging kidnaping. He petitioned for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the ground that he was not adequately represented by counsel at the time of his conviction and sentencing. His petition was patently without merit, and the district court correctly denied it.
When arrested and brought into district court, Cantrell was also liable for prosecution on several state felony charges. In the Rule 11 proceeding held at the time of his plea, Cantrell admitted every element of the kidnaping. He now says that, because he feared that he might receive a life sentence in one or more state courts, he falsely pleaded guilty to the kidnaping charge in the District of Oregon. While serving his federal sentence, he apparently had second thoughts about whether he would have received a more severe sentence elsewhere. This, however, is not a matter for which an attorney should be required to give warranties when he is appointed to represent a defendant in a different case in a different court. The refusal of counsel to undertake to evaluate all the known and unknown consequences of Cantrell’s returning to Idaho or Montana in no way constitutes a failure to represent Cantrell in the case in which representation was undertaken.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
467 F.2d 1363, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-floyd-cantrell-v-united-states-ca9-1972.